Assassins in the Palace, omg suicide attacker GAME OVER

Erg0 · Post Post #11 (isolation #0) » Tue Jul 03, 2007 4:28 pm

I can neither confirm nor deny my agreement or disagreement with Albert's post at this time.

Erg0 · Post Post #13 (isolation #1) » Tue Jul 03, 2007 7:15 pm

Ooh, off-topicness!

My avatar is from a Tool album cover, I think - that is, it's definitely Tool-related but I'm not sure of its exact origin. I stole it from http://www.toolshed.down.net.

I'm a little concerned about the assertion in your sig, though. I hope this doesn't affect our relationship.

Erg0 · Post Post #16 (isolation #2) » Tue Jul 03, 2007 8:07 pm

WIFOM!!!

Erg0 · Post Post #32 (isolation #3) » Wed Jul 04, 2007 12:08 pm

I think that the benefit of withholding discussion until the assassins can't talk is potentially huge. I support this approach, even though it is a little boring.

Patrick, I suspect the reason that such tiny tells led to lynches in the first game was that it was played in a very compressed time period. That game only ran for two and a half hours from beginning to end.

Erg0 · Post Post #36 (isolation #4) » Wed Jul 04, 2007 7:33 pm

I suspect that he means that saying "don't lynch people that vote for the kings" could be seen as an attempt to protect the assassins from repurcussions if they hit one of the kings randomly with their vote.

Of course, if none of the guards vote for the kings then it will be pretty obvious who they are before long, so what Yos said is sound strategy.

Erg0 · Post Post #85 (isolation #5) » Thu Jul 05, 2007 11:02 am

I'm not going to vote until tomorrow.

Erg0 · Post Post #89 (isolation #6) » Thu Jul 05, 2007 11:16 am

Besides which, how are you supposed to make a case against someone if they only post when they vote? We're going to be working with some pretty scant evidence if we take that approach.

Erg0 · Post Post #92 (isolation #7) » Thu Jul 05, 2007 11:22 am

undo wrote:If we lynch someone today, scum will not benefit from another night for talk and thus they will talk less, therefore it's good for town.

I don't know if I've explained it well. But let's suppose Kelly gives 48 hours for scum to talk after each lynch.

If we don't lynch anyone till Saturday and lynch, say, Monday, scum will have talked 6 days (4 days: Wed 4 Jul - Sat 7 Jul; 2 days: Mon 9 Jul - Tue 10 Jul).

But if we lynch someone today or tomorrow, scum will have less time to talk: 3 or 4 days (because if we lynch someone today, it's closed thread and 2 days for scum to talk).

The only time the thread gets closed is if we lynch scum. If we lynch a guard then the thread is not locked, we just go to the next day. The next opportunity that the scum will get to talk is when we lynch one of them. This theory does not work for that reason.

On the effect of mislynches: I'm not sure if everyone's realised this, but the main issue if we mislynch is that it reduces the list of possible targets for the assassins, meaning that they have a greater chance of correctly picking one of the kings when they make their kill. There's a little more to it, but I suspect that's what Adel has in mind for tomorrow.

Erg0 · Post Post #95 (isolation #8) » Thu Jul 05, 2007 11:30 am

One more thing: what's with all the people saying "we have to lynch Adel now"? We only have to lynch her if we've decided that we're going to play the entire game that way.

If we establish now that every time someone gets 4 votes we lynch them, then we'll be bound by that for the entire game, and we're pretty much going to be taking potshots in the dark. However, if we establish that it is ok to vote and then unvote someone, we have more flexibility in our voting patterns on later days. If we restrict ourselves to rigid patterns of behaviour then the exceptions to those patterns will soon become glaringly obvious.

Erg0 · Post Post #98 (isolation #9) » Thu Jul 05, 2007 11:33 am

How d'you mean? I replied to that above.

Erg0 · Post Post #100 (isolation #10) » Thu Jul 05, 2007 11:35 am

That one I did miss.

Erg0 · Post Post #111 (isolation #11) » Thu Jul 05, 2007 1:32 pm

Kelly Chen wrote:What a tragic, needless death! You could have just asked her to say something that only a guard would know.

What, like who the kings are? Geez, even the mod is out to get us!

Erg0 · Post Post #117 (isolation #12) » Thu Jul 05, 2007 7:14 pm

Likewise, I have a gut leaning towards Albert but I can't quantify it yet.

Also, since this game looks like being particularly lurker-sensitive I wanted to officially note that I'll be absent for 2 days, starting tomorrow morning (my time).

Erg0 · Post Post #121 (isolation #13) » Fri Jul 06, 2007 12:21 am

I'll reiterate what I said previously: the only "rules" that we need to follow in voting are those that we establish ourselves. Inconsistency is actually our friend here.

Erg0 · Post Post #151 (isolation #14) » Fri Jul 06, 2007 8:36 am

Vote: Albert B. Rampage

Now I'm going to Sydney!

Erg0 · Post Post #221 (isolation #15) » Sun Jul 08, 2007 12:15 pm

No need to prod me, I posted a couple of pages ago to say that I'd be away for two days. All of this strategy discussion is very interesting, but since everyone seems to have different viewpoints we may just need to lynch all of the people we don't agree with and go from there.

In that spirit, I'm testing my own theory:

Unvote, Vote: YogurtBandit

Albert's been much better on the last couple of pages, and YB has contributed little substance to the game thus far.

Erg0 · Post Post #222 (isolation #16) » Sun Jul 08, 2007 12:21 pm

Also: the idea of using scumlists instead of votes is at least an attempt at solving the problem, but they're going to end up serving as votes by proxy anyway. A vote in this game has value beyond its contribution to a lynch - it also represents who a person is willing to lose. A list of suspicions is just the same thing in different clothing, and also makes it easier for the scum to see patterns in peoples' suspicions.

I guess the benefit is a more unified approach, byt we could well end up with scumlist wagonning (i.e. "he put that guy at the top of list so I'll do the same on mine").

Erg0 · Post Post #278 (isolation #17) » Thu Jul 12, 2007 1:22 pm

Was that a hammer? I kinda thought Albert was onto something there, but obviously the rest of the town doesn't agree with me. I guess we'll have to wait and see...

Erg0 · Post Post #298 (isolation #18) » Fri Jul 13, 2007 11:41 am

Battle Mage wrote:oh and
FoS: Erg0
for what could be construed as distancing yesterday.

Distancing? From whom?

Vote: YogurtBandit

, since he actually does appear scummy to me.

Erg0 · Post Post #301 (isolation #19) » Fri Jul 13, 2007 12:06 pm

Can't speak for everyone else, but for me it's a carryover vote from yesterday. He was appearing to lurk, and hasn't improved since then.

Erg0 · Post Post #368 (isolation #20) » Sat Jul 21, 2007 12:12 am

I must admit that I'm finding this game difficult to get a handle on, mostly because I'm often forced to act in a way that is inconsistent with what I think is the best course of action. At this stage it looks like all we can do each day is wagon the person that looks scummiest and hope for the best, since any other approach would require agreement by most, if not all, players to follow a unified strategy (and this agreement is obviously not occurring).

I'm going to have a re-read and pick a vote target for today.

Erg0 · Post Post #387 (isolation #21) » Tue Jul 24, 2007 7:35 pm

Agreed. Particularly when he was on the unsuccessful wagon yesterday.

Vote: JDodge

Erg0 · Post Post #423 (isolation #22) » Mon Jul 30, 2007 1:20 pm

JDodge, I know you won last time by semi-randomly speedlynching people, but taking that approach leads to this becoming little more than a game of chance. I think it goes against the grain for many players to take this approach for that reason.

Speaking personally, I don't think that one win using that approach makes it the ideal strategy for this type of game. Having said that, at least we're getting some discussion now. I'm going to

Unvote

and hope that we get some more input before lynching today.

Erg0 · Post Post #442 (isolation #23) » Tue Jul 31, 2007 2:04 pm

I agree with that part, there are some scumtells that only apply in this game and not in others - e.g. appearing not to know the identity of the Kings.

Erg0 · Post Post #444 (isolation #24) » Tue Jul 31, 2007 2:31 pm

I can support that.

Vote: Battle Mage

Erg0 · Post Post #460 (isolation #25) » Wed Aug 01, 2007 12:42 pm

Maybe it's time to try something different - maybe wagon one of the kings for a bit and see where it goes?

I figure our chances of winning are pretty low if we don't find one of the assassins today - we're down to 5 guards, 2 kings and 2 assassins at this point, and the ratio is only going to get worse.

Erg0 · Post Post #462 (isolation #26) » Wed Aug 01, 2007 2:00 pm

Well obviously

I'm

not going to do it, given that I suggested it. It's an idea to consider, though - nothing else has worked so far.

Erg0 · Post Post #482 (isolation #27) » Fri Aug 03, 2007 1:06 pm

Ugh. What is this achieving,exactly? If Gorrad gets hammered then I really hope he's scum, or we're badly screwed because a number of people are still voting without any real reasoning...

Erg0 · Post Post #489 (isolation #28) » Mon Aug 06, 2007 8:17 pm

Well, let's see here:

7 players remain, 4 of which are guards, 2 kings and 1 assassin. So any given pro-town player has 4 players to choose from (excluding themselves and the kings, of course), giving us more or less a 25% chance to lynch the last assassin today. Tomorrow that number becomes 33%.

If we can find the assassin in the next couple of days then we're looking good to avoid a double king kill at the last gasp (only a 6.7% chance today and a 10% chance tomorrow that the assassin will hit both kings), but once we get down to 4 townies (2 guards + 2 kings) the odds start to look decidedly better for the assassin.

I'm sure that the assassins are at least vaguely aware of these numbers, so I'm thinking that Gorrad probably wasn't bussed yesterday - unlike most mafia games, it definitely works against the scum if either of them dies earlier than is absolutely necessary. I'm actually starting to come around to JDodge's point of view, even though I'm not especially happy with this approach from a purist's perspective.

Vote: Jack

Erg0 · Post Post #492 (isolation #29) » Mon Aug 06, 2007 9:54 pm

Sorry, you're right - I should have been more specific. I meant what you said, that he probably wasn't bussed by someone that was on the wagon early. Fortunately the assassins were kind enough to kill the person who hammered, so that saves us some WIFOM at least.

Erg0 · Post Post #502 (isolation #30) » Tue Aug 07, 2007 2:16 pm

Any reason you don't want to start the wagon yourself, KaleiDoscope?

Erg0 · Post Post #510 (isolation #31) » Wed Aug 08, 2007 9:45 am

I'm not so sure about this one - I could almost flip a coin between you two...

Erg0 · Post Post #518 (isolation #32) » Wed Aug 08, 2007 5:29 pm

Vote: Kaleidoscope

I'm not sure that I agree.

Erg0 · Post Post #522 (isolation #33) » Wed Aug 08, 2007 5:54 pm

That tell only really works if you ignore the fact that everyone else has been doing pretty much the same thing for the whole game.

Erg0 · Post Post #523 (isolation #34) » Wed Aug 08, 2007 5:54 pm

EBWOP: That was directed at Yosarian2

Erg0 · Post Post #525 (isolation #35) » Wed Aug 08, 2007 6:22 pm

Zindy did make a quick switch between 493 and 498:

Zindaras, 493 wrote:I'd be voting Jack now if it weren't for the fact that it'd be fairly stupid and anal.

Zindaras, 498 wrote:Actually, I don't care. I don't give a rat's ass. I don't even know why I'm discussing this with you. You can't be the last scum, as Jack already is.

Vote: Jack

Hmmm...

Erg0 · Post Post #528 (isolation #36) » Wed Aug 08, 2007 11:47 pm

Um.

...

Erg0 · Post Post #529 (isolation #37) » Thu Aug 09, 2007 7:58 pm

Oops, I miscounted and thought that was lynch.

I'm not buying the Zindaras thing. Then again, I didn't buy the Gorrad thing either, so maybe that's a positive sign for the wagon.

Erg0 · Post Post #560 (isolation #38) » Mon Aug 13, 2007 10:12 am

HAIL TO THE KING, BABY!!!

(I've been waiting all game to say that)

Yeah, I was basically clueless as to the identity of the other king - it was a really tough spot at the end there when Zindy was at lynch-1 because I was afraid that he was the other king, and if I hammered him it would have been obvious that I was the a king too. I guess I should have just voted for Sarc, he was the only person that I was fairly certain wasn't a king.

Seriously, I was trying to feed in little bits of craplogic and bad play all the way through the game but I don't think that

anyone

voted me for the entire thing. I'm glad that Sarc didn't go and look at voting patterns or we would have been mightily screwed. Well whatever works in the end, I suppose.

The game itself was interesting, but I think it highlighted the difficulties that occur when you start to increase the size of the informed group (in this case the guards). It becomes very difficult to reach a consensus on how to approach the game, and the people who want to talk and strategise end up at the mercy of those that just want to speedwagon.

Overall I had fun, and this was an interesting experiment, but I'd only do it again if I liked the player group. Thanks for running things, Kelly!

Erg0 · Post Post #562 (isolation #39) » Mon Aug 13, 2007 10:34 am

I didn't really start doing it until it was becoming clear that nobody was going to challenge me otherwise. Maybe everyone just thought their king was an idiot.

Incidentally, that mathematical analysis I was doing a couple days ago had a big hole in it. I guess nobody reads statistics...

Erg0 · Post Post #564 (isolation #40) » Mon Aug 13, 2007 10:48 am

Actually I was referring to the fact that my assumption was incorrect - each king has 5 players to choose from, not 4, because they don't know who the other king is.

Of course, my sums might be wrong too.

Erg0 · Post Post #566 (isolation #41) » Mon Aug 13, 2007 11:00 am

LOL, clearly I was being too subtle.

Erg0 · Post Post #569 (isolation #42) » Mon Aug 13, 2007 11:55 am

Apologies, perhaps I should have said that we're lucky that you didn't attach more weight to voting patterns. I wasn't meaning to imply that you weren't paying attention. As you say, it's far more obvious to me because I was

trying to get voted

and nobody would do it. This game was something of a crapshoot for both sides in the end.

Erg0 · Post Post #577 (isolation #43) » Mon Aug 13, 2007 11:25 pm

[quote="KaleiÐoscøpe"]Also, at some points, I actually forgot Erg0 was in the game... >.>[/quote]

I was being inconspicuous.

Erg0 · Post Post #578 (isolation #44) » Mon Aug 13, 2007 11:28 pm

Actually, in all seriousness the nature of the king's role was such that I couldn't really start wagons or hammer people, just in case the other king was found and it became clear that I didn't know who he was. What K-scope said above about me actually applies to him from my perspective as well, because neither of us was able to do much that would make us stand out.